Judging Freedom - COL. Lawrence Wilkerson: Trump Delusional over Tariffs and Iran.

Episode Date: April 3, 2025

COL. Lawrence Wilkerson: Trump Delusional over Tariffs and Iran.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

you Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Thursday, April 3rd, 2025. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson joins us now. Colonel, always a pleasure. Um, I have a lot to talk to you about from tariffs to Iran, but before we get there, do you have an opinion, Colonel, on the bellicosity? I'm gonna play a tape for you in a minute. Coming out of, uh, out of the mouths of European leaders, where are they going with this? of the mouths of European leaders. Where are they going with this? I think they're operating as I said, before we went on the air in the world of the insane,

frankly, I don't know if you read Andrew Cockburn's piece, Andrew sometimes can go deeply into things in odd directions, but this piece was really good. He demonstrated in the piece several things. One was how utterly dependent European countries, particularly France, Germany, and Britain, are on the United States. And not just for money, but for almost everything involved in the high-tech fields in their military and, for that matter, in other other fields too like main battle tanks and armor personnel carriers and other things like that, particularly

airplanes and how it would take at least 10 years and probably longer for them to break out of that lock hole Lockheed Martin having much of it and develop their own. So we're looking at a bunch of piss ants, militarily speaking, who would take a decade to become anything more than piss ants, saying that they're elephants. This is Ursula. Watch this. This is Ursula Von der Leyen at her unleashed worst,

a Chris number 22. We had a very good meeting of the coalition of the willing. The coalition of the willing has gotten bigger, stronger, and very determined. I've basically three key takeaways. The first was a broad discussion on how to step up in the support for Ukraine in the short term, financially and military-wise, the military needs that are there in Ukraine that have to be fulfilled, but also the financial needs. And here I can contribute that we will front load the EU part of the G7 loans for Ukraine. Second topic, keep up the pressure on Russia.

It was very clear that the sanctions stay in place. What we want is a just and lasting peace agreement. That is the goal. And the third key takeaway was on the long-term support for Ukraine and our own European defense posture. Here of course the Readiness 2030 plan is crucial. It provides up to 800 billion euros of defense investment possibilities for the member states. And this means, for example, joint procurement with Ukraine, joint procurement with Ukraine in the European Union, but also in the Ukrainian defense industry.

It's strengthening the defense industrial base of Ukraine. And of course, we need also a credible deterrence and defense posture in the European Union. And thus, we have to develop our own defense industrial base. You think this woman is not only delusional, I think she's a danger to the peace and security of Europe. Thank God she doesn't have an army at her command. I'm going to quote the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius again when he said the object of life is not to be amongst the majority,

it's to not be amongst the insane. She's amongst the insane. She has no army, she has no navy, she has no air force. She's not even really a democratically elected leader. And she's speaking as if she were speaking for 700-what million, count the Russians out, say 500 million Europeans who have probably about an 80% less dissent rate with her. That is to say, they don't believe what she's saying and aren't going to support what she's saying.

And, you know, I've heard Colonel McGregor talk about this and he's absolutely right. It takes 10 years to build an army, minimum. It takes 15 years to build a non-commissioned officer who's going to be a really good platoon sergeant. It takes a long time. Europe has not been doing this for decades. It's been on the tit, as it were, the US tit. And it will take quite a while for it to do what she's doing. What's she going to do in the interim? And what's she going to do when the governments that might support, I don't think they would, but might support what she's talking about, become governments that aren't going to support it in such key countries

as Germany, France, even Britain? This is nonsense. It's insanity. They dwell in the realm of the insane. Colonel, I'm going to bring you back to your years in the State Department. Was this a George W. Bush or Dick Cheney phrase, the coalition of the willing? I mean, I had to smirk when I heard her say that. I couldn't believe, you know, that just testifies to the insanity. That was Donald Rumsfeld.

That was when he was going on about there are unknowns that you don't know, you don't know, and they're known. Right, right. Yeah, and the Coalition of the Willing, because we couldn't get anybody but Australia and some Argentines, I think, and maybe one or two other countries to participate with us. And of course, we got our poodle, Britain,

to participate with us. So it became the Coalition of the Willing. How once said to me, he turned to me and he said, how many people are coming in from Australia? I said about a company. How many humans is that? 100? 150, maybe. Wow. Well, Colonel, was there any military purpose, just from a military perspective now, served by bombing civilians in Yemen? Not a bit, not a bit. And I understand from very good sources in Sana'a and in Hodeidah that about 45 to 50 percent of the casualties are women and children. And the Pentagon even this morning admitted it, not to that

percentage but they said we're targeting things now that are going to cause a lot of collateral damage. No joke, a lot of collateral damage. Meanwhile, you're looking at Al-Ansar, the Houthis having shot down now what my son flies, MQ-9 Reaper drones, shot down 16 of them. That's at 30 million a copy, that's about $480 million or almost half a billion dollars. My rough back of the envelope calculations show that the Houthis or someone providing this information or these weapons probably shot somewhere between between 60 and 70 million dollars worth of

weaponry to do that. They're in the world of the insane again, Judge. That's a hell of a bad exchange. These are war crimes, are they not? They are. And it's not a declared war. We go back to that time period when we got the Congress to pass in both houses, war powers resolution, constitutional resolution to get us out of backing the Saudis in this war.

Now we're not just backing the Saudis. We are the principal antagonist who consulted the Congress and the Constitution. Nobody. Look, the Secretary of Defense, he's back from his trip to Asia because I saw him yesterday sitting in the front row in the Rose Garden where President Trump was manifesting his ignorance of economics 101. We'll get to that in a minute. But the Secretary of Defense Colonel, when he was in Japan about three days ago, was boasting about how the United States will defend Taiwan from China. A, what kind of sense does it make to raise that when you're in the Far East?

B, is it even conceivable that the United States could defeat the Chinese Navy and Army if they decide to use military force to retain control or acquire control of Taiwan? First part of your question, I understand the administration's position now, is that we need strategic clarity rather than strategic uncertainty, which helped us for the last 50 years or so, ever since the communique, ever since Nixon's visit to Beijing. We wouldn't say that we wouldn't do anything to cause a war, and China wouldn't do anything

to cause a war. That was called strategic ambiguity. Now, strategic clarity in Hexeth has just made that clarity very firm. Again, dwelling in the world of the insane because the answer to your second question is I don't even think we would come to Taiwan's defense because we would get beaten so badly and have to go nuclear. I just don't, I can't imagine the Pentagon recommending defending Taiwan. I just can't. Last week, the, uh, president after boasting about the success, his word of the bombings in some in Yemen, uh, a statement defied by an eyewitness by the name of Pepe Escobar, our friend and

colleague who was there, said that this is just a prelude. He's ready to bomb Iran. He also said last week, I'm going to use his phrase, when you and I were kids, we would get in trouble for saying this, but it's entered the parlance now. He's, quote, pissed off at Putin's impatience in the, excuse me, at Putin's patience in the negotiations over Ukraine. He also sent B-52s to fly over the Indian Ocean. I can only imagine what that costs. What is going on here? Is this any way to negotiate with Vladimir Putin? Neither Putin nor the Ayatollah or whomever is going to be in the deal making in Iran, and the Ayatollah is ultimately behind whatever happens. I think Trump is trying to build negotiating pressure in both places and he's failing miserably with Putin because Putin doesn't have to yield to this kind of pressure. He may be succeeding to a certain extent with the security group in Tehran because I think

they do want a need a deal and I know they don't want a war so get it getting a war would be a rewarding rewarding Bibi Netanyahu too significantly and Bibi's in real trouble now especially with Cuttergate this this is a scandal that just won't quit I think what it means is that when the Emir was sending money, per Bibi's wishes, to Hamas and to Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Bibi was taking a cut of that money. And they have proof of that. So I think this is the end of Bibi Netanyahu, if anything at all still resembles justice in Israel. So Iran is content to watch this happen and see what results afterwards and not to go to war with the United States and to have a deal in the process

that would cause sanctions to be lifted. So and I think Trump understands that. So I think what he wants here is a deal. I've lost the bubble on Russia. I have no idea what he's trying to do. Do you see any connection between Trump unleashing Netanyahu and the IDF to slaughter innocents in Gaza? Last week the IDF executed one after another. Yes. Another 15 UN healthcare workers. There was no outrage. There was no international outrage except in the Arab countries. Do you see any connection between Trump's impatience with Putin and his giving Netanyahu whatever he wants, even more than what Biden was giving him?

I don't see a connection other than perhaps Trump's ego. What I do see is that Israel is in big trouble right now on the other front in Syria. They were, uh, essentially stopped in their latest armored movement and they took casualties, they had to fly in medical evacuation helicopters and they had to evacuate those casualties and they had to retreat. had to evacuate those casualties and they had to retreat. Not only that, Turkey is going bangers on its construction of an F-16 airfield. F-16 is already there in one place in northern Syria.

And I think Israel is going to be checked in Syria and it's going to be checked rather dramatically and fairly soon. And these things are just crowding in on Netanyahu in a way that I don't see, I don't see how he survived to this point, but beyond this, I think he's in deep, deep trouble. Well, here's what happened to him. Uh, last week. Now I spent the bulk of my career. In a courtroom and I never ever even heard of this happening in American courtroom.

He's on the witness stand testifying before a panel of three judges. They don't have a jury. He's a defendant in a criminal case. It's an old fashioned bribery case. It's not this cutter thing. No. While he's there, one of his senior aides is arrested in this cutter scandal. The police enter the courtroom with a warrant for Netanyahu and persuade the judges to stop the trial so that they can interrogate him immediately before he can talk to and get his story straight with the guy they've just arrested. I'm telling you he's in a mess. He's in a huge mess and even his ability to manipulate the judiciary in Israel, almost to the point it doesn't exist, is fading and fading fast. Not only that, the people in Israel are getting angrier and angrier.

The polls for channel 12 in Israel showed 69% of the population of Israel, and I assume that means Arab and Jewish, is against what Netanyahu is doing to their judiciary and is willing to go to the streets over it. This can't keep happening without his government falling. Colonel, your background is in the military and diplomacy, mine is in law and the constitution. Neither of us is a professional economist, but we both understand basic economics. Isn't a tariff a tax? To me, ultimately it is.

I understand, I think, some of the arguments. Do you know Catherine Austin Fitz? I bet you do. I've been reading her latest Solari report. And some of the things that she talked about in the previous one were about tariffs. This one's mostly about Bitcoin and getting rid of cash and what it means and so forth. I think we're looking at an attempt by some people behind the scenes, as it were, call them oligarchs or whatever,

call them Elon Musk type people, Peter Thiel type people. I think we're looking at an attempt to destroy some things that are going to make them very, very wealthy as the destruction takes place and make Americans and perhaps other global citizens very, very poor. And that's what's going on. We're looking at this deep machinations of things behind the scenes. And my question is, does Trump know what he's doing? Does he understand what he's doing? I don't think he understands basic economics 101, which we all took many years ago. But two plus two still equals four, and if you tax something, you have less of it. These are basic rules that don't change with the passage of time.

For example, he has banned or banned, he's put a tax on not only foreign motor vehicles, but parts from foreign countries. There isn't a motor vehicle made or a truck made in the United States of America with 100% American parts. Nor anywhere else in the world. Right. So does he even realize he's going after his base. He's going after farmers and bull-caller people that are going to be spending more for everything from toasters and automobiles. The Republicans doing a CR on the farm bill bill that is continually, has the continuing resolution passed with respect to it, favors the big guys, kind of Agri, Archer Daniels, Middleton,

all those big people in the farming business, and does not favor the small farmer. So he's losing vote after vote after vote in places like Iowa and Texas and elsewhere. There is an argument out there that he is going to, with regard to the terrorists, that he's going to do what he had done before. He's going to rescind them quickly. That is to say, he'll let them stay in there for about a week, maybe two weeks, three weeks, and then he's going to piecemeal go out there and rescind them. What the hell will he have accomplished

Bearing the daylight set of people today the stock market's down 1500 points. Yep Maybe he feels good when he does that. I don't know. I I can't figure the guy out. I really there's a very very lucid wall street journal report of the impact to U.S. automakers and American consumers from these tariffs. Cut number 14, Chris. This chart shows where cars sold in the U.S. are coming from. All of these cars now face that 25 percent auto tariff. But this 53 percent of U.S.-made cars is also affected by that tariff because of all of those foreign parts. Some of the major components, this is for the Ford F-150.

They have an alternator, create current. It's from Mexico. We have half shafts. These deliver torque to the wheels from the driveline. They're from Canada. We have tires, of course, five of them. These come from Korea. Of course, you have to have wheels, in this case, a styled track of wheels.

These all come from Mexico. Those tires from South Korea would face that auto tariff and any reciprocal or universal tariff placed on the country. Those parts from Canada and Mexico, well, that's where it gets more complicated. Eventually they would face that auto tariff, any reciprocal or universal tariff, and an additional Mexico-Canada tariff. But the White House said parts compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, or USMCA, remain tariff-free until there is a process

to apply tariffs to their non-U.S. content. And for some parts, like a transmission, there will be a lot of content to consider. This is going to be disruptive on day one. It's going to increase the cost of doing business. The total amount depends on the vehicle. A Cox Automotive estimate shows a car made in the U.S. would incur $3,000 in costs from the Canada-Mexico tariffs, plus another $3,000 from the tariffs on foreign-made auto parts. Then research shows an added $400 for the

steel and aluminum tariffs, and more for any reciprocal or universal tariffs. I'd like to show this to Joe Sixpack wearing his MAGA cap and see if he's still wearing it. I think Trump still thinks, or thinks he's still in the realm of Alexander Hamilton. You know, we went to a Hyundai plant in Seoul, Korea, and we opened the hood and we looked at the round clips, the round clips alone. We actually took several of them off so we could find the fabrication data and so forth.

In that Hyundai, we removed nine round clips. You know what I'm talking about. It holds a hose on a fitting or whatever. Those nine round clips came from nine different countries, making the point that was just made there in the film. It ain't Alexander Hamilton's world anymore. Tariffs do not do what they maybe did in the beginning of our country, and they're very

dangerous instruments because they don't. It's a very complicated multi-node world now, business as well as politics. Colonel, I don't want to put you on the spot and you know I love you, but we have an administration that is deporting people because of the freedom of speech, that doesn't understand economics 101, and is engaging in war crimes in Yemen.

Where are we going? To hell, in a handbag, in a handbags labeled America. This is, as I said at the beginning, we are dwelling in the realm of the insane. I can't think of a better phrase to describe it. I don't know what it means for us other than financially, economically, security-wise, foreign policy-wise. I just watched Marco Rubio on a stage with Ruta, the new secretary general of NATO. Right. What Marco Rubio was doing after a very effusive introduction

of him by Ruta, which included every other senator or so, look at what we're doing in NATO. Look at what we're going to do in NATO. Look at what we're going to do in NATO, look at what we're going to spend in NATO and so forth. And then Rubio's response was his running against JD Vance three and a half, four years from now. That's what he was doing because he was saying everything Vance had said at the UNIX Security Conference was not true. The United States was

still a stalwart member of NATO. There was no reason to doubt the United States integrity with regard to its promise to be a stalwart member of NATO and so forth and he's talking to a secretary general who's just just blasted him indirectly

with regard to what they said. You know, I know what once a neo con always a neo con no the are a Colonel. How candid the two of us can be. It's like we're sitting in a bar just blasting the things that are irritating us. Hex ass scares me. He really frightens me. This is serious, serious stuff. You know, I've known him for years. I've argued that he's not qualified. And every time you turn around, you know, I want him to be under oath, uh, before the Senate Intel committee and see if he repeats the fact that what they put on this website or this texting, uh, was not, uh, protected by national secrets. It was a war plan. Of course it was. Of course it doesn't have to have a number. Doesn't have to have a file number. It was operational data.

Colonel, thank you very much. Thank you for your time and look forward to seeing you again next week. All the best. Really take care. Sure. Coming up at three o'clock this afternoon, Professor John Mearsheimer and mad as a wet hand over these tariffs at four o'clock, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Judge on the Palo Alto for Judging Freedom. You